Going into the winter season, most of us are open to catching this and other flu. Please use common sense and good hygiene to keep health. Wash your hands often, eat well and get as much rest as possible.

PARIS, Aug. 29 (Xinhua) — A/H1N1 flu is spreading at an “unbelievable” speed, with “a very severe form of disease” attacking the lungs of healthy young people, the World Health Organization (WHO) has warned in an interview published by French daily Le Monde on Saturday.

“Sixty percent of the deaths cover those who have underlying health problems,” Director-general of the WHO Margaret Chan said, adding that the remaining 40 percent of the deaths are young adults in good health, “who die of a vital fever in five to seven days.”

“This is the most worrying fact. Up to 30 percent of people in densely populated countries risked getting infected,” Chan noted.

The WHO announced in a statement that the A/H1N1 pandemic virus is now the dominant influenza strain around the world.

“All governments must prepare for the worst,” Chan stressed, adding that intensive healthcare services were required.

According to the latest WHO report, more than 2,180 people around the world have died from the virus since April.

In a perfect example of discrimination against a Christian parent, a liberal, activist judge has order a Christian child into public school for; get this now; her “vigorous defense of her religious beliefs to [her] counselor suggests strongly that she has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any other point of view.” Is this for real?? This is discrimination against Christians, pure and simple!!

A 10-year-old homeschool girl described as “well liked, social and interactive with her peers, academically promising and intellectually at or superior to grade level” has been told by a New Hampshire court official to attend a government school because she was too “vigorous” in defense of her Christian faith.

The decision from Marital Master Michael Garner reasoned that the girl’s “vigorous defense of her religious beliefs to [her] counselor suggests strongly that she has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any other point of view.”

The recommendation was approved by Judge Lucinda V. Sadler, but it is being challenged by attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund, who said it was “a step too far” for any court.

The ADF confirmed today it has filed motions with the court seeking reconsideration of the order and a stay of the decision sending the 10-year-old student in government-run schools in Meredith, N.H.

The dispute arose as part of a modification of a parenting
plan for the girl. The parents divorced in 1999 when she was a newborn, and the mother has homeschooled her daughter since first grade with texts that meet all state standards.

In addition to homeschooling, the girl attends supplemental public school classes and has also been involved in a variety of extra-curricular sports activities, the ADF reported.

But during the process of negotiating the terms of the plan, a guardian ad litem appointed to participate concluded the girl “appeared to reflect her mother’s rigidity on questions of faith” and that the girl’s interests “would be best served by exposure to a public school setting” and “different points of view at a time when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief … in order to select, as a young adult, which of those systems will best suit her own needs.”

According to court documents, the guardian ad litem earlier had told the mother, “If I want her in public school, she’ll be in public school.”

The marital master hearing the case proposed the Christian girl be ordered into public school after considering “the impact of [her religious] beliefs on her interaction with others.”

“Parents have a fundamental right to make educational choices for their children. In this case specifically, the court is illegitimately altering a method of education that the court itself admits is working,” said ADF-allied attorney John Anthony Simmons of Hampton.

“The court is essentially saying that the evidence shows that, socially and academically, this girl is doing great, but her religious beliefs are a bit too sincerely held and must be sifted, tested by, and mixed among other worldviews. This is a step too far for any court to take.”

“The New Hampshire Supreme Court itself has specifically declared, ‘Home education is an enduring American tradition and right,'” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Mike Johnson. “There is clearly and without question no legitimate legal basis for the court’s decision, and we trust it will reconsider its conclusions.”

The case, handled in the Family Division of the Judicial Court for Belknap County in Laconia, involves Martin Kurowski and Brenda Kurowski (Voydatch), and their daughter.

The ADF also argued that the issue already was raised in 2006 and rejected by the court.

“Most urgent … is the issue of Amanda’s schooling as the school year has begun and Amanda is being impacted by the court’s decision daily,” the court filing requesting a stay said. “Serious state statutory and federal constitutional concerns are implicated by the court’s ruling and which need to be remedied without delay.

“It is not the proper role of the court to insist that Amanda be ‘exposed to different points of view’ if the primary residential parent has determined that it is in Amanda’s best interest not to be exposed to secular influences that would undermine Amanda’s faith, schooling, social development, etc. The court is not permitted to demonstrate hostility toward religion, and particularly the faith of Amanda and Mother, by removing Amanda from the home and thrusting her into an environment that the custodial parent deems detrimental to Amanda.”

“The order assumes that because Amanda has sincerely held Christian beliefs, there must be a problem that needs solving. It is a parent’s constitutionally protected right to train up their children in the religious beliefs that they hold. It is not up to the court to suggest that a 10-year-old should be ‘exposed’ to other religious views contrary to the faith traditions of her parents. Could it not be that this sharp 10-year-old ‘vigorously’ believes what she does because she knows it to be true? The court’s narrative suggests that 10-year-olds are too young to form opinions and that they are not yet allowed to have sincerely held Christian beliefs,” the ADF said.

“Absent any other clear and convincing evidence justifying the court’s decision, it would appear that the court has indeed taken sides with regard to the issue of religion and has preferred one religious view over another (or the absence of religion). This is impermissible,” the documents said.

The guardian ad litem had an anti-Christian bias, the documents said, telling the mother at one point she wouldn’t even look at homeschool curriculum.

President Obama has a prescription for those receiving unnecessary tests and treatments: focus on what’s important and add an ounce of prevention.

“Things like mammograms and cancer screenings and immunizations — common-sense measures that will save us billions of dollars in future medical costs,” he said at a town hall meeting hosted by AARP last month.

It seems reasonable enough that “unnecessary” tests can add up, and “necessary” tests like cancer screenings might catch disease early enough to prevent expensive medical procedures and prescription drugs down the line.

Or maybe not.

“When you talk about prevention that involves visiting a doctor and stumbling upon a high cholesterol that you didn’t know about or a high blood pressure, that kind of medical prevention almost inevitably leads to more medical things being done, more medications being prescribed,” Dr. Abraham Verghese of the Stanford University School of Medicine told FOX News.

After more tests, a patient with high cholesterol could be prescribed a statin, which might reduce his chance of a heart attack. But because only one or two men among several thousand with high cholesterol might suffer a heart attack, that ounce of prevention could be too costly.

“If you’re looking at a population of men, for every life you save, it costs $150,000 to extend life by one year, in terms of statin use,” Verghese said.

And take prostate cancer. The current Prostate Specific Antigen or PSA screenings are sensitive enough to detect cancers that may never even impair patients. But doctors can’t yet predict which are harmless and which are deadly, meaning that radiation or surgery could leave some of those with harmless cancers feeling worse than if they’d been never been treated.

There is one ounce of prevention that everyone agrees would help cut cuts: exercise, lose weight, watch your diet, cut down on cigarettes and alcohol. But that’s easier said than done. Some lawmakers working on the health care legislation believe that the only way to accomplish those behavioral changes is to reward them.

“If there is a real incentive, what happens once you get people into it,” said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who is a physician. “They like it — ‘I am feeling better, I’m active.'”

There are other problems with preventive care. How do you change a patient’s attitude that “my test is important but not the one for the guy down the hall?”

And will government-run health care mean rationing of tests? Doctors say without tort reform they’ll continue to order often unnecessary tests to avoid malpractice suits. Finally, Dough Elmendorf, director of the Congressional Budget Office, says researchers generally find that the added costs of widespread use of preventive services tend to exceed the savings from averted illness.

Emperor Obama now wants the power to shut down the internet during times of “emergency”. This reminds me of some of the third world African counties who shut down their phone systems to combat possible insurrection. How long are we going to let this power grabbing yahoo in the White House get away with this type of thing? Ae we going to wait until the government has taken away ALL of our freedoms?

A Senate bill would offer President Obama emergency control of the Internet and may give him a “kill switch” to shut down online traffic by seizing private networks — a move cybersecurity experts worry will choke off industry and civil liberties.

Details of a revamped version of the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 emerged late Thursday, months after an initial version authored by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.V., was blasted in Silicon Valley as dangerous government intrusion.

“In the original bill they empowered the president to essentially turn off the Internet in the case of a ‘cyber-emergency,’ which they didn’t define,” said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which represents the telecommunications industry.

“We think it’s a very bad idea … to put in legislation,” he told FOXNews.com.

Clinton said the new version of the bill that surfaced this week is improved from its first draft, but troubling language that was removed was replaced by vague language that could still offer the same powers to the president in case of an emergency.

“The current language is so unclear that we can’t be confident that the changes have actually been made,” he said.

The new legislation allows the president to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” relating to “non-governmental” computer networks and make a plan to respond to the danger, according to an excerpt published online — a broad license that rights experts worry would give the president “amorphous powers” over private users.

“As soon as you’re saying that the federal government is going to be exercising this kind of power over private networks, it’s going to be a really big issue,” Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told CNET News.

A Senate source familiar with the bill likened the new power to take control of portions of the Internet to what President Bush did when he grounded all aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001, CNET News reported.

Spokesmen for Senator Rockefeller and the Commerce Committee did not return calls seeking comment before this article was published.

But Rockefeller, who introduced the bill in April with bipartisan support, said the legislation was critical to protecting everything from water and electricity to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records.

“I know the threats we face,” Rockefeller said in a prepared statement when the legislation was introduced. “Our enemies are real. They are sophisticated, they are determined and they will not rest.”

The bill would also let the government create a detailed set of standards for licensing “cybersecurity professionals” who would oversee a single standard for security measures.

But many in the technology sector believe it’s a job the government is ill-equipped to handle, said Franck Journoud, a policy analyst with the Business Software Alliance.

“Simply put, who has the expertise?” he told FOXNews.com in April. “It’s the industry, not the government. We have a responsibility to increase and improve security. That responsibility cannot be captured in a government standard.”

Clinton, of the Internet Security Alliance, praised President Obama’s May science policy review, which he said would take cybersecurity in the right direction by promoting incentives to get the private industry to improve its own security measures.

But he faulted the Senate bill, which he said would centralize regulations for an industry that is too varied to fall under the control of a single set of rules without endangering the economy and security.

“We think a lot of things need to be done to enhance cybersecurity,” he told FOXNews.com, but this bill is “not something that we could support.”

08.28.09

Some time after this, Jesus crossed to the far shore of the Sea of Galilee (that is, the Sea of Tiberias), and a great crowd of people followed him because they saw the miraculous signs he had performed on the sick. Then Jesus went up on a mountainside and sat down with his disciples. The Jewish Passover Feast was near.

When Jesus looked up and saw a great crowd coming toward him, he said to Philip, “Where shall we buy bread for these people to eat?” He asked this only to test him, for he already had in mind what he was going to do.

Philip answered him, “Eight months’ wages would not buy enough bread for each one to have a bite!”

Another of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, spoke up, “Here is a boy with five small barley loaves and two small fish, but how far will they go among so many?”

Jesus said, “Have the people sit down.” There was plenty of grass in that place, and the men sat down, about five thousand of them. Jesus then took the loaves, gave thanks, and distributed to those who were seated as much as they wanted. He did the same with the fish.

When they had all had enough to eat, he said to his disciples, “Gather the pieces that are left over. Let nothing be wasted.” So they gathered them and filled twelve baskets with the pieces of the five barley loaves left over by those who had eaten.

See Mr. Westbrook’s Bible Story Murals here.
If your church is looking for a unique way to bring the Word of God to it’s children and young people, take a look at Doug Westbrook’s Bible Story Murals. Each wall sized mural is based on the hand painted originals Mr. Westbrook painted at Central Baptist Church in Houston, Texas and represents a different well known Bible story.

Obama’s Department of Propaganda (formerly known as the mainstream news media) at it’s best.

The refusal by ABC and NBC to run a national ad critical of President Obama’s health care reform plan is raising questions from the group behind the spot — particularly in light of ABC’s health care special aired in prime time last June and hosted at the White House.

The 33-second ad by the League of American Voters, which features a neurosurgeon who warns that a government-run health care system will lead to the rationing of procedures and medicine, began airing two weeks ago on local affiliates of ABC, NBC, FOX and CBS. On a national level, however, ABC and NBC have refused to run the spot in its present form.

“It’s a powerful ad,” said Bob Adams, executive director of the League of American Voters, a national nonprofit group with 15,000 members who advocate individual liberty and government accountability. “It tells the truth and it really highlights one of the biggest vulnerabilities and problems with this proposed legislation, which is it rations health care and disproportionately will decimate the quality of health care for seniors.”

Adams said the advertisement is running on local network affiliates in states like Louisiana, Arkansas, Maine and Pennsylvania. But although CBS has approved the ad for national distribution and talks are ongoing with FOX, NBC has questioned some of the ad’s facts while ABC has labeled it “partisan.”

“The ABC Television Network has a long-standing policy that we do not sell time for advertising that presents a partisan position on a controversial public issue,” spokeswoman Susan Sewell said in a written statement. “Just to be clear, this is a policy for the entire network, not just ABC News.”

NBC, meanwhile, said it has not turned down the ad and will reconsider it with some revisions.

“We have not rejected the ad,” spokeswoman Liz Fischer told FOXNews.com. “We have communicated with the media agency about some factual claims that require additional substantiation. As always, we are happy to reconsider the ad once these issues are addressed.”

Adams objects to ABC’s assertion that his group’s position is partisan.

“It’s a position that we would argue a vast majority of Americans stand behind,” he said. “Obviously, it’s a message that ABC and the Obama administration haven’t received yet.”

Dick Morris, a FOX News political analyst and the League of American Voters’ chief strategist, conceptualized the advertisement and said its purpose was to “refocus” the debate on health care reform.

“I feel the whole debate on health care reform needed to be refocused on the issue of Medicare,” he told FOXNews.com. “Most of the debate had been on issues of socialized medicine and cost. I felt that the impact of the legislation in cutting the Medicare program and enforcing rationing needed to be addressed.”

Morris, a onetime advisor to former President Bill Clinton, said he was particularly troubled by ABC’s decision not to air the spot.

“It’s the ultimate act of chutzpah because ABC is the network that turned itself over completely to Obama for a daylong propaganda fest about health care reform,” he said. “For them to be pious and say they will not accept advertising on health care shuts their viewers out from any possible understanding of both sides of this issue.”

Last Sunday, I took a couple of guests to church. I just met Lisa back in March. But I’ve known her husband David for fifteen years – ever since he took my “intro” class at UNC-Wilmington. David just pleaded guilty to one count of receiving child pornography. In all likelihood, he’ll soon be sentenced to eight years in federal prison.

It was really awesome when David reached out to me in February wanting to hear more about my conversion to Christianity. It was far more awesome when he accepted Christ a few weeks later. Now, we’re working together – mostly doing radio shows – to warn people about the dangers of mainstream pornography. We try to warn people that it can lead to an acceptance of child pornography by gradual desensitization. We also tell people where they can go to get help.

But last Sunday at church I was slightly embarrassed in front of my guests. The source of my embarrassment was all of the women who came to the service dressed like they had been out at a bar. A lot of these women know that they can meet higher quality men at church than at a bar. But some don’t have enough sense to change clothes after making the transition from a bar to a church sanctuary.

One of the worst offenders was seated one row in front of us. She wasn’t like all of the other women who were content merely to show their breasts. She had to wear a dress that was thin enough to let the whole congregation know she wears thong underwear. It was even more disturbing than the 13-year olds who wear torn Daisy Dukes instead of wearing a bra.

When women come to church dressed like this they seldom stop to think that a recovering sex addict might be in the congregation. And they seldom stop to think that there are married men in the congregation who are struggling with lust issues. The church should be a place where men can come to seek help as they battle these temptations. It’s a shame that some of the temptations are following them into the church and pulling up a chair right beside them.

A few years ago, Tim, the (now retired) senior pastor at a local United Methodist Church did something I truly respected. During camp meeting month (August) he talked about why the congregation dresses casually and sings folksier songs during that month. But then, he turned toward a section of young women and reminded them that some people were dressing a little too casually throughout the rest of the year.

BOSTON — A Democratic push to appoint a successor to the late Sen. Edward Kennedy is sparking a political tempest in Massachusetts, infuriating Republicans and dividing Democrats who only five years ago passed a law requiring that voters decide on Senate vacancies.

On a day when members of both parties paid their respects to Mr. Kennedy, a Democratic icon who died this week of brain cancer, Republicans accused Democrats of hypocrisy. In 2004, the state’s Democrat-controlled legislature changed the law to prevent the governor from appointing an interim successor after a U.S. Senate seat becomes vacant. Instead, the new law requires that a special election be held between 145 and 165 days after the position becomes vacant.

At the time, Democratic Sen. John Kerry was running for president and Massachusetts had a Republican governor, Mitt Romney. Proponents of changing the law argued that a gubernatorial appointment was undemocratic and that only voters should decide on a replacement. Democrats also feared Mr. Romney would appoint a Republican.

Now, with Mr. Kennedy dying three years before his term was up, some Massachusetts Democrats are reversing course, calling for Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick to appoint an interim replacement to hold office until the special election can be held. They now argue the state shouldn’t be without full Senate representation for months, especially with pressing issues such as health care before Congress.

The Massachusetts situation is the latest to erupt over filling vacant U.S. Senate seats, following particularly messy appointments in New York and Illinois.

Away from the political infighting, mourners lamented Massachusetts’s loss of clout in the U.S. Senate. “Whoever goes in will not have remotely close to the influence he had,” said Ted Glynn of Boston. “That’s a big concern.”

The question of how to fill Mr. Kennedy’s seat is vexing Democrats. In 2004, Mr. Kennedy supported a special election rather than a gubernatorial appointment. Yet more recently, he wrote to Mr. Patrick and legislative leaders, urging that Massachusetts give the governor the power to appoint an interim successor.

So far, besides deciding not to pursue an indictment of Gov. Bill Richardson for corruption, the Obama Justice Department has among other things dropped charges against Black Panthers wielding nightsticks and intimidating voters in Philadelphia, secured the release of terrorist detainees from Guantanamo Bay, quashed efforts by the state of Georgia to ensure that all voters are United States citizens and therefore able to vote, and most recently announced that it will investigate and possibly prosecute CIA officials with regard to what it deems questionable conduct in terrorist detainee interrogations which ultimately saved American lives.

This, from a president who campaigned on promises to fundamentally change the culture of corruption in Washington, D.C., only to stock his own cabinet with tax cheats and hire an ever-increasing number of “czars” who require neither an FBI clearance nor a congressional hearing and who report to nobody but the White House. This, from a president who, in 2007, gave a radio interview in which he promised to immediately task his Attorney General with an investigation of the Bush administration, only to just this spring say that he wanted to “look forward” instead of back, and just on Tuesday maintaining that Eric Holder is on his own and acting “independently.

At best, Barack Obama is a hypocrite of the worst order; at worst, he has absolutely no control over his administration. Either way, it certainly isn’t “change” anybody can believe in.

NEW YORK — The United Nations is recommending that children as young as five receive mandatory sexual education that would teach even pre-kindergarteners about masturbation and topics like gender violence.

The U.N.’s Economic, Social and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) released a 98-page report in June offering a universal lesson plan for kids ranging in age from 5-18, an
“informed approach to effective sex, relationships” and HIV education that they say is essential for “all young people.”

The U.N. insists the program is “age appropriate,” but critics say it’s exposing kids to sex far too early, and offers up abstract ideas — like “transphobia” — they might not even understand.

“At that age they should be learning about … the proper name of certain parts of their bodies,” said Michelle Turner, president of Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, “certainly not about masturbation.”

Turner was disturbed by UNESCO’s plans to explain to children as young as nine about the safety of legal abortions, and to advocate and “promote the right to and access to safe abortion” for everyone over the age of 15.

“This is absurd,” she told FOXNews.com.

The UNESCO report, called “International Guidelines for Sexuality Education,” separates children into four age groups: 5-to-8-year-olds, 9-to-12-year-olds, 12-to-15-year-olds and 15-to-18-year-olds.

Under the U.N.’s voluntary sex-ed regime, kids just 5-8 years old will be told that “touching and rubbing one’s genitals is called masturbation” and that private parts “can feel pleasurable when touched by oneself.”

By the time they’re 9 years old, they’ll learn about “positive and negative effects of ‘aphrodisiacs,” and wrestle with the ideas of “homophobia, transphobia and abuse of power.”

At 12, they’ll learn the “reasons for” abortions — but they’ll already have known about their safety for three years. When they’re 15, they’ll be exposed to direct “advocacy to promote the right to and access to safe abortion.”

True to form, the Dems show no shame in evoking Kennedy’s name to score cheap political points. At that time he had not even been dead 48 hours. In the footsteps of Clinton’s “let’s do it for the children”, we have “let’s do it for Kennedy”. With the Democrats it’s always “the end justifies the means”. Any means. Sickening.

Do it for Teddy.

In statements that came steadily streaming out of Capitol Hill Wednesday morning within hours after Sen. Ted Kennedy’s death, Democratic lawmakers tried to embed that message in the health care reform debate.

With the push for legislation hitting a rough patch, Democrats are trying, however delicately, to use Kennedy’s passing as a rallying cry for the legislation, reminding voters that the package idling on the Hill was “the cause” of Kennedy’s life.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whose version of the bill has drawn heated criticism from constituents across the country, invoked health care reform almost immediately after Kennedy’s death was made public.

“Senator Kennedy had a grand vision for America, and an unparalleled ability to effect change,” she said in a written statement. “Ted Kennedy’s dream of quality health care for all Americans will be made real this year because of his leadership and his inspiration.”

It’s unclear whether the death of the Kennedy family patriarch will invigorate proponents of the debate.

Liberal Democrats may once again rally to President Obama’s side, following concerns about the possibility that the final product would not contain a government-run insurance plan.

But unless and until his seat is filled by a like-minded lawmaker, his absence also means one fewer vote for health care reform should it come to the floor. And Republicans made little reference to health care reform while expressing their condolences Wednesday.

A street preacher is accusing police of violating his constitutional rights after officers arrested him for not having a parade permit while he spoke out against homosexuality on a public sidewalk in Manchester, Ga.

Chris Pettigrew and Pastor Billy Ball and of Faith Baptist Church in Primrose, Ga., were arrested multiple times Aug 24 after they held signs on a public street corner telling people to repent and declaring homosexuality a sin.

“There were four of us to begin with. We weren’t preaching with any amplified sound,” Pettigrew told WND. “Basically, as soon as we got out of the cars and started toward the sidewalk, Manchester city police officers showed up and asked us if we had a parade permit.”

He continued, “We did not have a parade permit, and we informed them that we had no plans for obtaining a parade permit because we weren’t in a parade.”

Pettigrew said officers from the Manchester Police Department were initially cordial when they told him he must have a permit to stand on the sidewalk with his sign.

“We simply said, ‘We can’t do that. It’s our constitutional right to free speech. We’re not impeding any kind of traffic. We’re peaceably assembled, so we’re going to do what we came to do,'” he said.

At that moment, another officer arrived, joined the others and told the men they must obtain a permit to remain on the sidewalk.

Displeased with their answer, Pettigrew said, “they handcuffed us and took us to the city jail in Manchester.”

Later, while Pettigrew and his comrades remained in jail, Pastor Ball and another man arrived at the street corner to share his message.

So, police arrested Ball.

Meanwhile, officers issued Pettigrew a citation, returned his belongings and ushered him out of jail.

“So we went back to the corner because it’s America, and there was no sense in arresting us the first time,” Pettigrew said. “We weren’t going to let them bully us into going home.”

He continued, “By the end of the day, I had been arrested three times, and my pastor was arrested four times – simply because we wouldn’t go away.”

By dark, his group had grown to 11 men – including four who had driven from North Carolina and South Carolina to stand on the sidewalk and support the original four who had been arrested.

“By that time they had ceased arresting us, with the exception of my pastor, who was arrested late in the evening,” Pettigrew said.

“We had some people who came down simply because we were being arrested.”

With a tone of frustration, Pettigrew said, “We’re sick and tired of people telling us what we can and can’t do. It’s not constitutional.”

When WND contacted Manchester police and asked why Pettigrew had been arrested, a lieutenant who would not provide his name replied, “I can’t make any comments on that over the phone.”

Pettigrew said one young man who was arrested with his group was contacted by the police department and told charges would be dropped if he brought the citation back.

He maintains that his group always obeys the law “as long as it doesn’t interfere with constitutional rights.” However, he believes authorities detained his small group based on its message against homosexuality.

“If I were holding a sign that said, ‘Two large pizzas for $5,’ I don’t think I would have gotten a second look from police. I firmly and adamantly believe we were singled out and arrested because of the content of our speech,” Pettigrew said.

“If they arrest us for proclaiming the word of God, what will they arrest us for next?” he asked. “We need to get the word out that the rights of the American people are quickly being taken away, and nobody even knows it.”

Savor the silence of America’s self-serving champions of privacy. For once, the American Civil Liberties Union has nothing bad to say about the latest case of secret domestic surveillance — because it is the ACLU that committed the spying.

Last week, The Washington Post reported on a new Justice Department inquiry into photographs of undercover CIA officials and other intelligence personnel taken by ACLU-sponsored researchers assisting the defense team of Guantanamo Bay detainees. According to the report, the pictures of covert American CIA officers — “in some cases surreptitiously taken outside their homes” — were shown to jihadi suspects tied to the 9/11 attacks in order to identify the interrogators.

The ACLU undertook the so-called “John Adams Project” with the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers — last seen crusading for convicted jihadi assistant Lynne Stewart. She’s the far-left lawyer who helped sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, convicted 1993 World Trade Center bombing and N.Y. landmark bombing plot mastermind, smuggle coded messages of Islamic violence to outside followers in violation of an explicit pledge to abide by her client’s court-ordered isolation.

The ACLU’s team used lists and data from “human rights groups,” European researchers and news organizations that were involved in “(t)racking international CIA-chartered flights” and monitoring hotel phone records. Working from a witch-hunt list of 45 CIA employees, the ACLU team tailed and photographed agency employees or obtained other photos from public records.

And then they showed the images to suspected al-Qaida operatives implicated in murdering 3,000 innocent men, women and children on American soil.

Where is the concern for the safety of these American officers and their families? Where’s the outrage from all the indignant supporters of former CIA agent Valerie Plame, whose name was leaked by Bush State Department official Richard Armitage to the late Robert Novak? Lefties swung their nooses for years over the disclosure, citing federal laws prohibiting the sharing of classified information and proscribing anyone from unauthorized exposure of undercover intelligence agents.

ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero refused to comment on Project CIA Paparazzi and instead whined some more about the evil Bush/CIA interrogators. Left-wing commentators and distraction artists are dutifully up in arms about such “inhumane” tactics as blowing cigar smoke in the faces of Gitmo detainees. But it’s Romero blowing unconscionable smoke:

“We are confident that no laws or regulations have been broken as we investigated the circumstances of the torture of our clients and as we have vigorously defended our clients’ interests,” he told the Post. “Rather than investigate the CIA officials who undertook the torture, they are now investigating the military lawyers who have courageously stepped up to defend these clients in these sham proceedings.”

Courage? What tools and fools these jihadi-enablers be. Civil liberties opportunism is literally a part of the al-Qaida handbook. A terrorist manual seized in a Manchester, England, raid in 2005 advised operatives: “At the beginning of the trial … the brothers must insist on proving that torture was inflicted on them by state security before the judge. Complain of mistreatment while in prison.” Jihadi commanders rehearsed the lines with their foot soldiers “to ensure that they have assimilated it.”

Since 9/11, the selective champions of privacy have recklessly blabbed about counter-terrorism operations, endangered the lives of military and intelligence officials at Gitmo, and undermined national security through endless litigation. They accused Bush immigration officials of xenophobia for pursuing visa over-stayers from jihadi-friendly countries. They accused local law enforcement, FBI and other homeland security officials of “racial profiling” for placing heightened scrutiny on mosques and jihadi-linked charities.

Now, caught red-handed blowing the cover of CIA operatives, they shrug their shoulders and dismiss it as “normal” research on behalf of “our clients.”

But don’t you dare question their love of country. Spying to stop the next 9/11 is treason, you see. Spying to stop enhanced interrogation of Gitmo detainees is patriotic. And endangering America on behalf of international human rights is the ultimate form of leftist dissent.

There is growing concern, that through the use of “Czars” and government interference in a growing number of private business concerns, Obama will find a way to seize power, of the United States, practically overnight.
These are very scary times.

Will President Obama “seize power overnight” in a move to consolidate White House control of the U.S. government?

That’s the fear of Fox News anchor Glenn Beck who discussed the issue at length today with another broadcasting powerhouse, radio’s Rush Limbaugh.

“I fear this government, this administration has so much framework already prepared, that they will seize power overnight before anybody even gives it a second thought,” Beck said.

His comment came as he was analyzing the changing nature of the media since Obama’s election, citing the administration’s close ties with the NBC network, owned by corporate giant General Electric:

If you watch what could only be called the administration’s organ – anything involved with GE or NBC – you’ve got [GE CEO] Jeffrey Immelt on the board of the Federal Reserve, you have him in the Oval Office consulting not only on health care, but the financial situation, and they are an organ.

If you watch MSNBC, I contend that you will see the future because they are laying the ground for a horrible event … anything from the right, there’s some awful event and I fear this government, this administration has so much framework already prepared, that they will seize power overnight before anybody even gives it a second thought.

Limbaugh responded, “I don’t think they’re going to be able to seize it overnight without anybody knowing about it.”

The pair analyzed Obama’s appointment of Mark Lloyd, the nation’s first “chief diversity officer” at the Federal Communications Commission, and both agreed he is looking to severely limit free speech in America through a series of new initiatives without ever having to revive the “Fairness Doctrine” that was abandoned in 1985.

WND recently reported that Lloyd believes the policy was never actually repealed, and he is said to advocate crippling $250 million fines for radio stations whose programming does not meet with the government’s approval.

He’s also reportedly pushing for private broadcasters to pay licensing fees equal to their total operating costs. That money would then be used to enhance funding of government-subsidized networks such as National Public Radio.

“Citizen access to popular information has been undermined by bad political decisions,” Lloyd wrote in his 2006 book, “Prologue to a Farce: Communications and Democracy in America.” “Corporate liberty has overwhelmed citizen equality.”

“What they’re trying to do here to communications is simply stifle dissenting voices. They’re trying to wipe out any opposition,” Limbaugh explained. “The things he’s talking about doing to shut down radio are simply un-American. … It is a dangerous time. It’s the most dangerous time in my life for freedom and liberty in this country.”

Limbaugh maintained every action thus far by Obama has been designed to intentionally hurt, rather than help the nation.

“Look at what they’re doing to the U.S. economy,” he said. “Anybody with a sense of economic literacy would know this is not how you create jobs. You do not rebuild the private sector. This is being done on purpose. All of these disasters are exactly what Obama wants. The more crises, the better. The more opportunity for government to say, ‘Let us in and fix the problem.'”

Limbaugh has been maligned by some in the media for previous comments that he would like Obama to fail in implementing his policies, and he said today he was “uncomfortable thinking and saying these things about a man who’s been elected president of the United States.”

It is terribly upsetting and disconcerting, and I wish I didn’t think it and I wish I didn’t have to say it. But there’s no way to sugarcoat it. This is not politics as usual. This is not left versus right. This is not Republican versus Democrat. This is statism, totalitarianism versus freedom. And if these people are allowed to go where they want to go unchecked, then some people, a lot of people – I don’t think half the country, but close – will wake up one day and find, “My God, what the hell happened?” Because this is not what they voted for. They had no intention of this. They thought they were getting something entirely different and it is a responsibility that we all have being honest and earnest to inform people of what these possibilities are because they are very real.

Beck, who has a national radio show of his own as well as his television broadcast on the Fox News Channel, wondered about a perceived lack of coverage on the issues they were discussing.

“Where is the true outrage from anyone in the media?” asked Beck. “Why are these things not grabbing traction at this point?”

“I think the whole concept of reporting has gone out the window,” Limbaugh answered. “I call them the State-Controlled Media because it’s what they are. They’re just repeaters. They take dictation from [Obama Chief of Staff] Rahm Emanuel for the most part, and they simply run with it. It’s who they are, too.”

Despite the potential for doom and gloom, Limbaugh assured Beck that there was a ray of hope that Obama’s goals could be defeated.

“Passion, love of country, truth is going to outmaneuver and overpower fake passion, trumped-up people who are just given marching orders and sent out to act in a certain way,” Limbaugh said.

“I’m confident that this can be beaten back. If I weren’t, you know what, Glenn? I’d pack it all in and I’d spend my money before they take it and I’d go enjoy the rest of what my life is gonna be, but I –

“That’s quite a shopping spree,” Beck interrupted with a laugh. “Can I come with you?”

08.26.09

Over the years, I have had conversations with many people who cannot understand how the Antichrist will be able to seize world power so easily. How can a person come from “nowhere” and take over the entire world?
I believe our last election shows just how easy it will be for the Antichrist to accomplish this goal.I like how Ron Graham said it:

America seemed to want change at any cost. Many wanted a woman president and thought Hilary Clinton would have made a great choice. Others were in favor of Sarah Palin as vice-president, but are now looking forward to 2012 when she might run for the presidency. Some were contemplating Colin Powel as a viable candidate for president. Change is what America wanted and change we got.

The result of our desire for change got us more than we bargained for. America voted into office what they thought would be the first African-American president. But in all actuality, what they got is a demonic forerunner to a system that we Christians refer to as the anti-Christ. The color of his skin is not an issue. America elected a man who appeared upon the scene as basically an unknown entity, yet from behind those scenes lurked an evil force that had the ability to catapult this man systematically and stealthily like a well orchestrated military campaign into the White House. This was nothing less than supernaturally miraculous in nature. The problem being it was supernaturally demonically inspired. If the enemy of mankind wasn’t behind this man he would not have gotten to first base. He’s never supplied any true legal proof of his right to sit in the Oval Office of the United States of America as its duly elected president. And he had absolutely no managerial or executive experience whatsoever. Yet, there he sits basking in his false power tossing out our new marching orders to be followed as though he’s actually the king of the world.

I’m still sitting the fence on Obama’s constitutional citizenship issue, but like many, cannot understand why he just doesn’t put the matter to rest by providing the requested documents. It would be such a simple fix to this thorn in his side, but he has instead spent thousands of dollars to avoid doing so. It makes no sense to me, but I digress…

As Mr. Graham points out, how did a man, who was virtually unknown prior to 2007, who has only 142 days of Senate experience between his swearing in and his announcement of his intentions to run for president, who never introduced any significant legislation, get to the highest office in the land so easily?

One large aspect of the Obama phenomenon has to do with the way he was treated in the mainstream media. I jokingly call the mainstream media Obama’s “Department of Propaganda”, but there is more truth than fiction to this thought. We chronicled many instances, during Obama’s rise, when the press outright refused to ask him the same hard questions they were asking his rival, Senator McCain. Many found this odd, and a simple Google search will show that many conservatives and even some liberals were concerned that the press seemed to have lost it’s objectivity. The press acted in fact, that they were everything but on Obama’s payroll.

As a result, the average rank and file Americans, the ones who did not take the initiative to check other news sources, were never exposed to any of the negative aspects of Obama’s character or policies. The press “spun” Mr. Obama in a positive light and never asked him to explain himself. The press, in effect, “programmed” the general population to feel good about everything Obama and hate then sitting President Bush, and as an extension, everything Republican, including their candidates, Senator McCain and Governor Palin.

Well after the election, I had a conversation with a gentleman who voted for Obama, but was now upset with him. This gentleman claimed that Mr. Obama had lied about his policies. To my amazement, I actually ended up defending Mr. Obama. I asked this gentleman, while on the campaign trail, when did Mr. Obama ever come out and tell us what his stance was on this particular issue the gentleman accused Mr. Obama of lying about, or for that matter, any issue. I reminded this gentleman the only theme I heard was “change”. The press never asked Mr. Obama to be specific about what he stood for and how he was going to achieve it. How could this gentleman accuse Mr. Obama of lying when he was never asked to take a stand on any significant issue? The point is, Mr. Obama didn’t lie outright to everyone because he never said what he was going to do or how he was going to do it, and the press never asked!

The way in which the press treated Mr. Obama is a precursor to how the Antichrist will enter the scene; he will enthrall the press, who in turn will fail to ask any questions that might expose him for what he is.

Antichrist will be a charismatic personality, much like what we have seen in Obama, a person who will come at a time of public disgruntlement, with a message of “hope and change” for all people. He will enamor the press, he will demonize his opposition and capture the hearts of the people while making no specific promises of how he will rule or what he will do to make life better for all.
As with Obama, Antichrist’s promises from the campaign trail will show very little relationship to the actual actions he will perform once in power. He will ride to the top on his charisma, fooling a public ignorant of his true goals.

I must admit, I shared some skepticism that a person could accomplish this in today’s world. I felt that somehow all the “watchful” people would have to be gone, maybe many already “raptured” before this leader could take the world stage. I no longer believe that. The election of President Obama has shown me that people are ripe for the Antichrist right now.

The Bible tells us that the world is in for the worst times in its history. Every other war and disaster that has ever occurred will pale in comparison to what is coming.

The only way to avoid the coming cataclysm is a belief in Jesus Christ.

We Christians use the sometimes misunderstood cliche “saved” a lot. Many people don’t understand what this means. What it means is that a faith in Jesus will not only save your from an eternity in hell, but could quite possibly save you from “hell on earth” that the future will bring when God starts His judgment of mankind.

I like the Bible passages described as the Roman Road. This group of passages lays out why we need Jesus and how to begin a relationship with Him. Please take a moment to read it.

The Roman Road to Salvation.

The ROMANS ROAD….is a pathway you can walk.
It is a group of Bible verses from the book of Romans in the New Testament. If you walk down this road you will end up understanding how to be saved.

Romans 3:23 “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”
We all have sin in our hearts. We all were born with sin. We were born under the power of sin’s control.
– Admit that you are a sinner.

Romans 6:23a “…The wages of sin is death…”
Sin has an ending. It results in death. We all face physical death, which is a result of sin. But a worse death is spiritual death that alienates us from God, and will last for all eternity. The Bible teaches that there is a place called the Lake of Fire where lost people will be in torment forever. It is the place where people who are spiritually dead will remain.
– Understand that you deserve death for your sin.

Romans 6:23b “…But the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
Salvation is a free gift from God to you! You can’t earn this gift, but you must reach out and receive it.
-Ask God to forgive you and save you.

Romans 5:8, “God demonstrates His own love for us, in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us!”
When Jesus died on the cross He paid sin’s penalty. He paid the price for all sin, and when He took all the sins of the world on Himself on the cross, He bought us out of slavery to sin and death! The only condition is that we believe in Him and what He has done for us, understanding that we are now joined with Him, and that He is our life. He did all this because He loved us and gave Himself for us!
-Give your life to God… His love poured out in Jesus on the cross is your only hope to have forgiveness and change. His love bought you out of being a slave to sin. His love is what saves you — not religion, or church membership. God loves you!

Romans 10:13 “Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved!”
-Call out to God in the name of Jesus!

Romans 10:9,10 “…If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead, you shall be saved; for with the heart man believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.”
-If you know that God is knocking on your heart’s door,ask Him to come into your heart.

Jesus said, Revelation 3:20a “Behold I stand at the door and knock, if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him…”
-Is Jesus knocking on your heart’s door?

Believe in Him. Ask Him to come in to your heart by faith, and ask Him to reveal Himself to you. Open the Bible to the Gospel of John and read what God says about Jesus, about you, and about being born again.

God will help you. He loves you.

You need to look for a local church where God’s word is preached. The Bible says that we are to desire God’s word like a newborn baby desires mother’s milk. Aren’t you hungry to know the truth?

Water baptism is one of the ways you first show that you have been joined to Jesus. This is an action, and actions will not save you. However, it is an act of obedience and a symbol of commitment. The symbolism is this: When you go down in the water you show that You have been crucified and buried with Him,

And when you come up out of the water you show that you have been raised to walk with Him in newness of life. (See Romans chapter 6)

You have been born again. (See John chapter 3)

Your body has become God’s temple. Your heart is where He lives.

Forgiveness is yours in Jesus. And you belong to Him.

You were sin’s slave. But now…

You are a child of GOD!

John 1:12 “As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name!”

It amazes me that so many Christians today still do not support or recognize the importance of Israel in these end times. Many good Christian writers have done some very well informed commentaries on this issue and have exposed it for the ignorance that it is. I’m going to go one step further and say this is not only ignorance but a suppression of biblical fact and is satanically driven.

Israel is so interwoven all through scripture it is impossible to discount God’s “great nation”. To do so is rebellion against what God has decreed to be true.
ISRAEL: WHAT DROVE THE BEGINNING

It was for the establishment of a people for himself that God sent man throughout the earth. The command to, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” (Genesis 1:27-29), was because God knew that man would fall and one day need a redeemer.

He sent man out to populate the earth and, when man attempted to go against God’s will and began constructing the tower of Babel, God was forced to intervene and “confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.(Genesis 11:8-10).

Why? So that God could set a people “apart from the nations.”(Leviticus 20:23-25)
ISRAEL: ESTABLISHMENT

God eventually finds what He’s looking for in a great man, Abram.

Abram wasn’t perfect. He was far from it. But God saw something in him that even Abram couldn’t see. He saw the man Abram would become. More importantly, it was something HE would do himself.

“I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing.(Genesis 12:1-3)

“I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.”(Genesis 12:2-4)

And so God called him Abraham and the nation of Israel had begun.

It would not be for many years after Abraham’s death that it would happen, but, eventually, through this “great nation”, God would reveal His message of truth to the people. The law.
ISRAEL: THE LAW GIVERS

“When the child grew older, she took him to Pharaoh’s daughter and he became her son. She named him Moses, saying, “I drew him out of the water.”(Exodus 2:9-11)

Moses would go from a position of power to humility before God and, in doing so, would reveal the glory of God through his dealing with pharaoh. Why? Because he was a man from the “great nation” of Israel . Not because he was raised by pharaoh or was smart or was a ‘really good person’. It would be through Moses that the law of God’s heart would be revealed.

It is my experience that, in my studies of scripture, God regularly shows us a blueprint, if you will, in the past, of events that will take place in the future. One of these events was when God brought the Israelites to the Red Sea, not to lure them to destruction but to show them His glory as their only redeemer in a time of apparent total annihilation. Sound familiar? In a future situation Israel will once again be surrounded by enemies who look as if they are about to destroy them. At that moment, God will take over and by his own doing, wipe out all those who have come against her.

” ‘This is what the Sovereign LORD says: On that day thoughts will come into your mind and you will devise an evil scheme. 11 You will say, “I will invade a land of unwalled villages; I will attack a peaceful and unsuspecting people—all of them living without walls and without gates and bars. 12 I will plunder and loot and turn my hand against the resettled ruins and the people gathered from the nations, rich in livestock and goods, living at the center of the land.” 13 Sheba and Dedan and the merchants of Tarshish and all her villages [d] will say to you, “Have you come to plunder? Have you gathered your hordes to loot, to carry off silver and gold, to take away livestock and goods and to seize much plunder?” (Ezek. 38:10-13)

“18 This is what will happen in that day: When Gog attacks the land of Israel , my hot anger will be aroused, declares the Sovereign LORD. 19 In my zeal and fiery wrath I declare that at that time there shall be a great earthquake in the land of Israel . 20 The fish of the sea, the birds of the air, the beasts of the field, every creature that moves along the ground, and all the people on the face of the earth will tremble at my presence. The mountains will be overturned, the cliffs will crumble and every wall will fall to the ground. 21 I will summon a sword against Gog on all my mountains, declares the Sovereign LORD. Every man’s sword will be against his brother. 22 I will execute judgment upon him with plague and bloodshed; I will pour down torrents of rain, hailstones and burning sulfur on him and on his troops and on the many nations with him. 23 And so I will show my greatness and my holiness, and I will make myself known in the sight of many nations. Then they will know that I am the LORD.”(Ezek.38:18-23)

Isn’t prophecy amazing? Through the Red Sea, God eventually brought His people to their promised land. There was no question who saved them and in the future there will be no question again. Israel will be forced to recognize their redeemer again.
ISRAEL: THE MESSIAH

“ But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Though you are little among the thousands of Judah , Yet out of you shall come forth to Me The One to be Ruler in Israel , Whose goings forth are from of old, From everlasting.”(Micah 5:1-3)

“Remember that Jesus Christ, of the seed of David, was raised from the dead according to my gospel,”(2 Timothy 2:7-9)

It was through Israel that God would bring forth His Messiah, the One that not only would cleanse His “great nation” but the whole world.

God loved Israel so much that He chose to come out of that nation in the body of His perfect Redeemer, the Christ.

“Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.”(Matthew 1:22-24)

How incredible!

To hold a people in such high regard that He would allow a mere human woman to bear Him as her child. This is truly love beyond understanding. And then, to suffer and die for an undeserving world.

“But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed.”(Isaiah 53:4-6)

Praise God! Victory through our Lord!
ISRAEL: IMPOSSIBLE ODDS

The very fact that Israel exists today is an impossibility. Think about it.

This nation has been more relentlessly pursued by enemies, attacked more vehemently, and been more conspired against than all other nations combined. The only explanation for its existence today can be found in God’s perfect will.

Take a look at a map sometime. Israel is barely noticeable among its enemies and yet, despite the advantage of sheer numbers, Israel has repelled every attempt to destroy it.

Pharaoh couldn’t do it.

The Romans couldn’t do it.

Hitler couldn’t do it.

The whole Muslim world can’t do it.

What makes you think ANYONE can do it?

For man to come against God is pure prideful arrogance. And when we come against Israel, either militarily or politically, it is spiritual and national suicide. Our nation should take some lessons from history.

ISRAEL: COMPLETION

In the days ahead, and I believe it will be soon, God will again return to His “great nation”. The main reason for the tribulation to come is to complete Israel ’s appointed time.

Yes, it is also to test the nations, but primarily it’s to bring Israel to its true role on the earth. 144,000 Jewish witnesses will travel the earth preaching the message of God, sealed and protected by the Creator during the tribulation. And when the Messiah returns, He will establish His kingdom, coming through the eastern gate and setting up His throne in Jerusalem for a thousand years.

All for the glory of God.

Don’t be fooled. God has not forgotten or cast away His chosen people. To assume so is to reject what God Himself has decreed. And that’s just not wise from anyone’s perspective.

For those of you who have forgotten your Latin, it means “deeds, not words.”

There’s been a lot of overheated rhetoric about health care reform, but this saying is one that all Americans should return to when considering plans for a government-dominated health system.

In other words, we should judge government, not by its words, but by its deeds.

With this simple principle in mind, what follows are three examples why government can’t – and shouldn’t – run our health care system (at least not any health care system you or I would want to be dependent on).
Reason No. 1: Government Can’t Be Trusted With a Credit Card
Every family knows about making a budget and living within its means. Government, to put it bluntly, does not.

What if your husband had come home last Friday night and announced that he had racked up almost 30 percent more debt on the family credit card – including the mortgage and car loans – than he had told you about just a month ago?

Would you trust him to go out and start spending money to remodel the kitchen? And do you think he could get a loan to do it?

But that’s exactly what the Obama Administration did with their weekend news dump. They announced late Friday that the amount of money they don’t have but are nonetheless planning on spending over the next ten years isn’t the astonishing $7 trillion they estimated in May but is instead an astounding $9 trillion.

Add this to the fact that, after the administration sold its health care reform proposal on the grounds that it will reduce costs to the Treasury, the independent Congressional Budget Office determined that the House plan will actually cost an astounding $1 trillion-$1.5 trillion in the next ten years, which will be added directly to the federal debt. The director of the CBO testified before Congress last month that “[i]n the legislation that has been reported we do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount. And on the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs.”

Which do you have more faith in, the government’s happy talk of “bending the cost curve” or its record of out-of-control spending?

Deeds, not words.
Reason No. 2: Government Can’t Even Give Away Money Effectively
As the inimitable Andy McCarthy of National Review put it, “Compared to the infinite complexity of healthcare and health-insurance, cash-for-clunkers is kindergarten stuff. You trade in your old car for a new one that gets (slightly) better mileage and the government gives you money – between $3,500 and $4,500. How hard is that?”

Too hard for government bureaucrats, it turns out.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has boasted that the cash-for-clunkers program provided “a lifeline to the automobile industry, jump starting a major sector of the economy and putting people back to work.”

But look at the deeds, not the words.

Last week, cash-for-clunkers ended in a bureaucratic morass of red tape, failed promises and unanticipated costs.
Air Traffic Controllers Manning the Cash-for-Clunkers Hotline
Only a government bureaucracy could mess up a program designed to give away free money.

The government wizards who set up cash-for-clunkers initially budgeted to sell 250,000 cars in three months.

The program sold that many in four days.

And because the central planners who think they can provide government “competition” to the private health insurance market failed to accurately estimate how many government workers it would take to administer cash-for-clunkers, they had to take employees from the FAA – air traffic controllers, no less – to help manage the demand.

And what about the car dealerships the program was supposed to help in the first place? Even though the rebates were supposed to be paid within 10 days, only 7 percent of federal promises under cash-for-clunkers have been paid so far, leaving dealers with millions of dollars in unfunded government promises.
More Than Bureaucratic Incompetence, Political Business as Usual.

But there’s more to the cautionary tale of cash-for-clunkers than just bureaucratic incompetence.

This is a case study in what happens when politicians get involved in the marketplace.

Despite all the rhetoric of jump starting the auto industry, politicians’ priorities are to give free goodies to their constituents. So as far as they’re concerned, cash-for-clunkers has been a resounding success.

Forget the fact that they’re spending money they don’t have, or that car dealerships are left holding millions of dollars in empty government promises. They’re not concerned with the long-term, just the next election.

So tell us again why should we think bureaucrats and politicians will perform any better with our health care?
Reason No. 3: Government Would Rather Pay Crooks Than Manage Efficiently
There’s been a lot of worrying about the inevitability of government rationing health care under the Democratic reform bills in Congress.

Economists have known about this inevitability for a long time. Well, Americans can stop worrying. Government is rationing care already – and doing it in a particularly stupid way.

Studies have shown that early use of home health care after hospitalization – allowing patients to go home and be visited by a nurse to manage their care – saves Medicare billions of dollars.

So here is a case where an innovative government program actually saves the government money. Home health care is both more compassionate and more efficient. It reduces the likelihood a patient will be readmitted to a hospital by allowing her to heal in a more familiar setting.
Home Health Care Works, So Naturally Medicare Bureaucrats Cut Its Funding
So naturally bureaucrats at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services cut $34 billion from this compassionate, efficient program last week.

And if the House health care reform bill becomes law, an additional $56.8 billion will be cut from the program – an amount equal to almost the entire federal budget for home health care services in 2007.

What makes rationing care to the homebound all the more immoral is the fact that there is a much bigger pot of savings available to Washington if it only had the political will to look.
Instead of Seeking Savings from the Homebound, Why Not the Crooks?
As a new book by the Center for Health Transformation’s Jim Frogue details, criminals rip off the taxpayers to the tune of $80 billion to $120 billion each year in the current Medicare and Medicaid programs.

We’re not talking about inadvertent bill errors but outright fraud. Government health programs are currently paying men maternity benefits, giving taxpayer dollars to pizza parlors that are supposed to be HIV transfusion centers, and even paying dead patients federal health care benefits.

If ever there was a reason not to turn our entire health care system over to government it is this: Government can’t run the health care programs it already has. It would rather ration compassionate, effective programs than do the hard work of rooting out and punishing the crooks who are stealing our taxpayer dollars.
Facts are Stubborn Things
Americans have already heard a lot of rhetoric about health care reform, and we can expect to hear a lot more.

But as Ronald Reagan used to say, facts are stubborn things. And the facts of government’s track record in managing our money and delivering on its promises speak louder than any televised presidential speech or stage-managed town hall ever could.

So as the summer winds down and the debate rages on, let this be our mantra:

Facta, non verba.

Make a bumper sticker out of it.

Put it on a tee-shirt and wear it to a town hall.

And when someone asked you what it means, tell them that before we hand over more of our lives to government, we should consider how they’ve treated us so far.

Although I didn’t agree with Kennedy on any of his political views, we do need to pray for his family.

Sen. Edward Kennedy, the longtime Massachusetts lawmaker whose personal tragedies along with his professional triumphs and losses unfolded in the public eye, has died at his home in Hyannis Port after battling a brain tumor. He was 77.

His family announced his death in a brief statement released early Wednesday.

“We’ve lost the irreplaceable center of our family and joyous light in our lives, but the inspiration of his faith, optimism, and perseverance will live on in our hearts forever,” the statement said. “We thank everyone who gave him care and support over this last year, and everyone who stood with him for so many years in his tireless march for progress toward justice, fairness and opportunity for all.”